🔒 Locked

RenderMonkey vs. FX Composer

Started by krum May 25, 2006 at 4:57 PM 4 replies 2.4k views

Original Post

May 25, 2006 at 4:57 PM

Is there a general consensus to which of these is the better tool for developing DX shaders? I've been using them both, but I find FX Composer a waaay more usable than RenderMonkey. Maybe I'm just not seeing the value in RenderMonkey yet? Any thoughts?

ItsDoh

May 25, 2006 at 6:11 PM

Isn't RenderMonkey no longer a supported product?

dbzprogrammer

May 25, 2006 at 8:48 PM

Render Monkey was aimed for both artists and programmers, that's why it may seem a little less usable. I use it personally because of the environment, I enjoy it more.

dave

May 25, 2006 at 9:04 PM

I didn't like either, so i wrote a renderer that i continually update to handle any new effects for new shaders that i right.

Dave

discman1028

May 29, 2006 at 11:24 PM

RenderMonkey kicks arse IMO. FX Composer: I just can't use it. I should look into it more. But RenderMonkey seems more intuitive.

Also, I think you may open MS effect files (.fx) w/FX Composer (hence its name), but it doesn't always seem to work properly.

Daggett

May 31, 2006 at 3:42 AM

I have to use Rendermonkey since is supports reference rasterizer rendering. FX requires a card with PS 2.0 but my card still has PS 1.3. I think Rendermoney overall is ok but I will try FX when I get a new card soon.

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.